|
|
Post by therealriga on Sept 18, 2018 7:23:06 GMT
Of course. That and the other caveats that I put in the original post apply: people would vote differently, different coalitions would have ruled and been rewarded/punished appropriately etc etc. UKIP would obviously have done better but had STV or any proportional system been in place there's the possibility of a Conservative split in the Maastricht era into separate parties. Liberal - SDP merger would also have been less likely. Not sure MPs would’ve joined the Referendum Party in the same way as many joined the SDP. Thiugh an interesting fact is that precisely 1 Conservative MP defected to each: Christopher Brocklebank-Fowler (MP for Norfolk NW) joined the SDP and George Gardiner joined the Referendum Party. I'm not thinking Referendum party, I'm thinking some of the lesser Eurosceptic MPs getting the hump with Major and setting up their own party, where they would play a more prominent role and thrive better than under FPTP. Surprisingly though, Ireland has seen very little in the way of party splits. The Progressive Democrats in the 1980s were the last major ones (I'm not counting the usual factional splits among the minor left wing parties.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2018 7:32:02 GMT
Not sure MPs would’ve joined the Referendum Party in the same way as many joined the SDP. Thiugh an interesting fact is that precisely 1 Conservative MP defected to each: Christopher Brocklebank-Fowler (MP for Norfolk NW) joined the SDP and George Gardiner joined the Referendum Party. I'm not thinking Referendum party, I'm thinking some of the lesser Eurosceptic MPs getting the hump with Major and setting up their own party, where they would play a more prominent role and thrive better than under FPTP. Surprisingly though, Ireland has seen very little in the way of party splits. The Progressive Democrats in the 1980s were the last major ones (I'm not counting the usual factional splits among the minor left wing parties.) Aside from there being a Eurosceptic caucus I can’t see a new party being formed. Had Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams not been out of parliament in 1981 I don’t think they’d have left Labour. As it is, I can’t see the likes of Redwood et al forming a new party in the 90s. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 18, 2018 10:29:38 GMT
I agree about Williams, but Jenkins falling out with Labour was a much longer process - indeed that is why he left for a Brussels job in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Dec 29, 2019 13:40:14 GMT
2019:
Con 307 (+15)
Lab 238 (-54)
LD 45 (+23)
SNP 34 (+11)
DUP 5 (-4)
SF 4 (=)
APNI 4 (+3)
SDLP 3 (+1)
Brexit 3 (+3)
PC 3 (+2)
UUP 2 (=)
GP 1 (=)
IND 0 (-1)
Speaker 1 (+1)
Usual caveats apply. Brexit Party would obviously have contested and won more seats under such a system.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jan 1, 2020 9:53:34 GMT
I'm not thinking Referendum party, I'm thinking some of the lesser Eurosceptic MPs getting the hump with Major and setting up their own party, where they would play a more prominent role and thrive better than under FPTP. Surprisingly though, Ireland has seen very little in the way of party splits. The Progressive Democrats in the 1980s were the last major ones (I'm not counting the usual factional splits among the minor left wing parties.) Aside from there being a Eurosceptic caucus I can’t see a new party being formed. Had Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams not been out of parliament in 1981 I don’t think they’d have left Labour. As it is, I can’t see the likes of Redwood et al forming a new party in the 90s. Williams wouldn't have left- she is too tribal. Jenkins would have gone as he'd have realised that the boat had sailed for an old man in a hurry such as him and liked the limelight a defection would bring. |
|
myth11
Non-Aligned
too busy at work!
Posts: 2,839 
Member is Online
|
Post by myth11 on Jan 1, 2020 17:36:23 GMT
Just for lols Nottingham 3 seat STV.
2019 total votes 123458 so 30865 is the line.
Assuming parties are playing the STV game the candidates would be.
2 lab (outside chance of 3)
1 con
1 lib dem
1 green
1 Change UK
Results 2 lab 1 con.
69658 lab assuming good vote splitting or at least close to line should be 2 seats.
35207 con safe one seat.
Only really becomes fun if the parties have to put 3 up or lab puts 3 up.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Jan 2, 2020 11:21:26 GMT
Just for lols Nottingham 3 seat STV. 2019 total votes 123458 so 30865 is the line. Assuming parties are playing the STV game the candidates would be. 2 lab (outside chance of 3) 1 con 1 lib dem 1 green 1 Change UK Results 2 lab 1 con. 69658 lab assuming good vote splitting or at least close to line should be 2 seats. 35207 con safe one seat. Only really becomes fun if the parties have to put 3 up or lab puts 3 up. Any set of fantasy election results is "just for lols." Major party quota shares in Nottingham over those years... 1983: Con 1.66, Lab 1.52, SDP 0.52, Lib 0.29 1987: Con 1.73, Lab 1.70, SDP 0.37, Lib 0.18 Would depend on the split and third party transfers. Conservatives could maybe edge it in 1983, but Labour would probably take a second in 1987. 1992, 1997 and 2001 all have 1 full Conservative and 2 Labour quotas. 2005: Con 0.90, Lab 2.02, LD 0.84, UKIP 0.15, GP 0.06. Labour win 2 but very tight for the last, Conservatives probably just fending off a LD challenge. 2010: Con 1.10, Lab 1.73, LD 0.86, UKIP 0.12, BNP 0.11, GP 0.06. Also tight, but probably Lib Dem beating the second Labour. Subsequent elections revert to the default of 1 full Conservative quota and 2 Labour quotas. |
|
|
|
Post by polaris on Jan 2, 2020 13:37:03 GMT
I suspect that if we had STV, we would see more Independent candidates winning parliamentary seats (as in Ireland). Also, as in Ireland, some of the Independents would be sitting MPs or Councillors who had fallen out with their political parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Jan 2, 2020 14:17:35 GMT
I suspect that if we had STV, we would see more Independent candidates winning parliamentary seats (as in Ireland). Also, as in Ireland, some of the Independents would be sitting MPs or Councillors who had fallen out with their political parties. I think we would see more independents, though not to the same extent as Ireland. A 4-seater Dáil Éireann constituency has an electorate just over that of a Westminster constituency, around 75,000, so it's much easier for an independent with a local government base to win a seat in Ireland. |
|
|
|
Post by polaris on Jan 2, 2020 16:59:52 GMT
I suspect that if we had STV, we would see more Independent candidates winning parliamentary seats (as in Ireland). Also, as in Ireland, some of the Independents would be sitting MPs or Councillors who had fallen out with their political parties. I think we would see more independents, though not to the same extent as Ireland. A 4-seater Dáil Éireann constituency has an electorate just over that of a Westminster constituency, around 75,000, so it's much easier for an independent with a local government base to win a seat in Ireland. In Ireland, the strong Independent presence is partly due to the particularly parochial and clientelistic nature of politics there, not just the electoral system. But under STV you can get a seat with as little as 10-15% of first preferences and that would be doable for a strong locally-based Independent or an MP who had fallen out with their party. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jan 3, 2020 2:22:28 GMT
I think we would see more independents, though not to the same extent as Ireland. A 4-seater Dáil Éireann constituency has an electorate just over that of a Westminster constituency, around 75,000, so it's much easier for an independent with a local government base to win a seat in Ireland. In Ireland, the strong Independent presence is partly due to the particularly parochial and clientelistic nature of politics there, not just the electoral system. But under STV you can get a seat with as little as 10-15% of first preferences and that would be doable for a strong locally-based Independent or an MP who had fallen out with their party. UK STV seats would be a lot bigger than in Ireland, though. Even if we assume no reduction in MPs and three-seat constituencies, you're looking at three times the size. Make the system actually proportional, or take the opportunity to cut back the number of MPs and the scale of a UK STV constituency is closer to the Australian Senate than to the Dáil. |
|
myth11
Non-Aligned
too busy at work!
Posts: 2,839
Member is Online
|
Post by myth11 on Jan 3, 2020 7:07:50 GMT
In Ireland, the strong Independent presence is partly due to the particularly parochial and clientelistic nature of politics there, not just the electoral system. But under STV you can get a seat with as little as 10-15% of first preferences and that would be doable for a strong locally-based Independent or an MP who had fallen out with their party. UK STV seats would be a lot bigger than in Ireland, though. Even if we assume no reduction in MPs and three-seat constituencies, you're looking at three times the size. Make the system actually proportional, or take the opportunity to cut back the number of MPs and the scale of a UK STV constituency is closer to the Australian Senate than to the Dáil. The lib dems are looking at 3 to 6 seat constituencies with two singles and a double for the "islands" with a winning line of 25% for a 3 seat constituencies and 14.29ish% for 6 seat constituencies which is likely to prevent the greens plus others from gaining much. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 3, 2020 7:25:31 GMT
UK STV seats would be a lot bigger than in Ireland, though. Even if we assume no reduction in MPs and three-seat constituencies, you're looking at three times the size. Make the system actually proportional, or take the opportunity to cut back the number of MPs and the scale of a UK STV constituency is closer to the Australian Senate than to the Dáil. The lib dems are looking at 3 to 6 seat constituencies with two singles and a double for the "islands" with a winning line of 25% for a 3 seat constituencies and 14.29ish% for 6 seat constituencies which is likely to prevent the greens plus others from gaining much. I think that may underestimate the potential for change about how parties are perceived once STV was in place. The Greens may struggle to get to 14% in a FPTP election , because they are perceived as having no hope of getting 2 or 3 times that to have a hope of winning. If that becomes the target for a seat, it 's much more doable. |
|
myth11
Non-Aligned
too busy at work!
Posts: 2,839
Member is Online
|
Post by myth11 on Jan 3, 2020 7:46:37 GMT
The lib dems are looking at 3 to 6 seat constituencies with two singles and a double for the "islands" with a winning line of 25% for a 3 seat constituencies and 14.29ish% for 6 seat constituencies which is likely to prevent the greens plus others from gaining much. I think that may underestimate the potential for change about how parties are perceived once STV was in place. The Greens may struggle to get to 14% in a FPTP election , because they are perceived as having no hope of getting 2 or 3 times that to have a hope of winning. If that becomes the target for a seat, it 's much more doable. Looking at NI assembly results its seems to relies on others parties putting too many candidates with for example the greens won a seat in South Belfast in 2017 largely due to the DUP putting up 2 candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 3, 2020 7:55:03 GMT
I think that may underestimate the potential for change about how parties are perceived once STV was in place. The Greens may struggle to get to 14% in a FPTP election , because they are perceived as having no hope of getting 2 or 3 times that to have a hope of winning. If that becomes the target for a seat, it 's much more doable. Looking at NI assembly results its seems to relies on others parties putting too many candidates with for example the greens won a seat in South Belfast in 2017 largely due to the DUP putting up 2 candidates. Given that we are unlikely to get STV for UK parliamentary elections for a little while (to put it mildly) I really think we should explore in detail the way political partries manipulate STV elections to subvert the intentions of the designers of the system. I am tempted to suggest insisting that any party contesting a seat put up enough candidates to match the places available. Why not? |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Jan 3, 2020 11:16:52 GMT
Looking at NI assembly results its seems to relies on others parties putting too many candidates with for example the greens won a seat in South Belfast in 2017 largely due to the DUP putting up 2 candidates. Given that we are unlikely to get STV for UK parliamentary elections for a little while (to put it mildly) I really think we should explore in detail the way political partries manipulate STV elections to subvert the intentions of the designers of the system. I am tempted to suggest insisting that any party contesting a seat put up enough candidates to match the places available. Why not? Thomas Wright Hill, who is credited with designing the system, apparently based it on an election in a school assembly where students would stand beside the pupil they preferred. Students who noticed that their candidate had too much or too little support would then go and stand beside another candidate. So I'm not sure the intention of the designer of the system is being subverted, the whole point of it is to reduce the number of wasted votes, not to be proportional, though it does achieve party proportionality better than FPTP. Parties will always use whatever methods necessary to secure a favourable outcome for themselves. Tactical voting, targeting specific areas while putting up paper candidates in others, electoral pacts, joint lists or whatever. I don't see the benefit in forcing parties to put up a specific number of candidates. That would favour larger parties who already have vote management structures in place. It would be perfectly possible for them to run a paper candidate in such circumstances, who does no campaigning but is just there to make up the numbers. I can't see any benefit to that. I'd much prefer it if there was more education about how the system works. A lot of people still seem to view it more like a points system and are ignorant of the fact that a lower preference can never count against a higher preference. STV in UK general elections is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. To be introduced, it would need the acquiescence of one of the larger parties, almost certainly Labour and in that case, they'd probably prefer it to be kept to fairly small constituencies. A limited proportionality compromise. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jan 3, 2020 11:21:14 GMT
Given that we are unlikely to get STV for UK parliamentary elections for a little while (to put it mildly) I really think we should explore in detail the way political partries manipulate STV elections to subvert the intentions of the designers of the system. I am tempted to suggest insisting that any party contesting a seat put up enough candidates to match the places available. Why not? How do you enforce that? * We're a small party, we've got two members who are going to stand for election. * Sorry, this is a three-member seat, bugger off. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 3, 2020 11:47:46 GMT
Given that we are unlikely to get STV for UK parliamentary elections for a little while (to put it mildly) I really think we should explore in detail the way political partries manipulate STV elections to subvert the intentions of the designers of the system. I am tempted to suggest insisting that any party contesting a seat put up enough candidates to match the places available. Why not? How do you enforce that? * We're a small party, we've got two members who are going to stand for election. * Sorry, this is a three-member seat, bugger off. I'm thinking out of the box and not sure I have answers. My thought is that if a party is so small it cannot fill the places then individual candidates could stand as independents, but if they need to be considered a serious party they would need to have candidates to fill all the places available. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 3, 2020 13:53:34 GMT
How do you enforce that? * We're a small party, we've got two members who are going to stand for election. * Sorry, this is a three-member seat, bugger off. I'm thinking out of the box and not sure I have answers. My thought is that if a party is so small it cannot fill the places then individual candidates could stand as independents, but if they need to be considered a serious party they would need to have candidates to fill all the places available. Who conferred the role of Stalin on you then? |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Jan 3, 2020 16:25:01 GMT
How do you enforce that? * We're a small party, we've got two members who are going to stand for election. * Sorry, this is a three-member seat, bugger off. I'm thinking out of the box and not sure I have answers. My thought is that if a party is so small it cannot fill the places then individual candidates could stand as independents, but if they need to be considered a serious party they would need to have candidates to fill all the places available. I get where you're going with that, but I don't see any benefits. Let's imagine a hypothetical 5-seater Liverpool STV constituency (including Halewood.) For Labour, sure, it makes sense to put up 5 candidates since they'd be in the running for all 5 seats. But what're the benefits to anyone else? What's the sense in forcing Conservatives or Lib Dems, never mind any of the micro parties, to put up 5 candidates when they will be lucky to win a single seat? It also doesn't eliminate the vote management that you're trying to get rid of. In a hypothetical 4-seat Brighton & Hove, the Greens put up 4 candidates. But the other 3 do nothing. They just stay invisible and do no campaigning while Caroline Lucas pounds the streets and appears on all the posters and literature. Pointless. The losers from that would often be the smaller parties, which would be bizarre, since such a system would be introduced to give them more chance. I also don't think you've considered ballot paper length. In Liverpool in 2010, eleven parties stood. That's 55 candidates straight off. Add in a few more parties and independents inspired to try due to the greater chance of getting elected and you could easily be beyond the 70-candidate mark. Besides the logistical problems with that (3-foot ballot papers, finding a stage for that many candidates etc.) you would have a large number of spoilt votes and a fair bit of donkey voting, with people marking their own candidates, maybe a like-minded party and then just going down the ballot paper alphabetically. Again, that would defeat the point in the system, which is to have fewer wasted votes. |
|
